Saturday, August 26, 2006

What is Literature?

I hate reading so called "literary" books, most of them are extremely boring and the only good thing it can do is acting as a good hypnotic. (Tho when I have insomnia, I usually resort to studying my notes in bed. 100% effective. So these books have no use to me.)

I have always thought books should be entertaining. It's useless to write books only few can understand and appreciate. The same goes for movies and paintings. I still remember studying The Pearl (written by John Steinbeck) in English Literature in secondary school. It's so boring...
Don't get me wrong. I hate superficial stuff. Like comedy by Stephen Chow. I love books/movies that I can re-read/re-watch again and again, and discover new meaning every time.

Recently I have read a discussion on the web about definition of literature. Diana Gabaldon offered this amazingly good definition, which I think is very true...

"My personal definition of "literature" is "any book that _lasts_." By this definition, most of the literary prize-winners and short-listed titles aren't literature, because they're gone without a trace in three or four years--if not less. (Most people--even dedicated readers of "serious" stuff--can't tell you who was short-listed for the Orange, the Whitbread, the Man Booker, etc.--even from last year.)

Generally speaking, a book needs to have some substance in order to last--but damn few of those that last aren't entertaining.

(And fwiw, even though the _average_ hardcover book these days lasts six months or less on the shelves--all of mine are still in print in hardcover, fifteen years in and counting. Keep your fingers crossed. )"

No comments: